Ok, I'm following your reasoning a little better, but I still have to disagree. You agree that baptism is just a symbol, but by saying that it is a symbol that MUST be done for God to give us His gift, you are, in fact, placing a caveat on salvation...'this must be done or God will withhold His redemption'. This is NOT a biblical teaching. Again:
[For God So Loved the World]
[16] “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
(John 3:16 ESV)
[25] Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, [26] and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die. Do you believe this?”
(John 11:25-26 ESV)
[24] and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, [25] whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.
(Romans 3:24-25 ESV)
[4] But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, [5] he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, [6] whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
(Titus 3:4-6 ESV)
None of these mention the necessity of water baptism, it only speaks of needing faith in Jesus. Jesus saves us through His own loving goodness, not because of anything we do...it's quite clear.."not because of workd done by us in righteousness". Being baptized is an action we do, and to be able to chalk up our salvation to that decision we made, it goes against everything the Bible tells us.
Here's a small commentary for the titus verse:
Some have understood this as saying that baptism (“the washing”) causes salvation. However, in this context human deeds are clearly downplayed (“not because of works”) and the emphasis is on divine action and initiative (“he saved us”). The “washing” described here is the spiritual cleansing, which is outwardly symbolized in baptism.
I agree with it, we are washed clean on the inside by the Holy Spirit, not by the symbol of baptism. How many times did Jesus and others say that the 'new' baptism would be by the Holy Spirit?
I’ve given some commentaries at the end from those who were there.
You’re not following a logical methodology. As I said we must take Scripture in context. Believing in Christ means to become a disciple. None of the apostles taught that someone could simply believe in Christ without becoming a disciple. To become a disciple means to follow the teachings of someone, in this case Christ. When Jesus sent out the disciples at the Great Commission, He told them, ‘go and make disciples, baptizing them and teaching them all I have commanded you’. So, Jesus stated right there who a disciple is made, it is through baptism and teaching. In order to be a disciple one must be baptized; Jesus states that right in Scripture. If you have to be a disciple to be saved then it stands to reason that you have to be baptized, since you can’t be a disciple if you’re not baptized.
You’ve selected passages of Scripture that don’t explicitly state the necessity of baptism. However, that doesn’t negate the necessity of baptism. I’ve pointed out already that the context of the passage is important. However, proof texting is not the way we get a proper understanding of the faith. I said earlier that the entire process isn’t stated every time salvation is mentioned, there is no need. If you tell someone to make a cake, what do you say, would you make a cake? Or do you say make a cake by getting flower and water and butter and this ingredient and that one? No, you assume they know what it means to make a cake. Now, if you were teaching a child who never made a cake before, then you would go into the exact process. Look at who is being spoken to or about, believers or unbelievers. When they spoke to a believer about salvation there was no need to tell them that baptism was necessary, they already knew that. However, look at the words to the unbelievers.
You posted John 3:16, Jesus’ words to Nicodemus. You said it doesn’t mention baptism, and that verse doesn’t, but, the discourse does. Jesus just told Nicodemus that he needed to be born of water and the Spirit. Who is Jesus speaking to? An unbeliever
Then you quoted John 11:25-26. Baptism isn’t mentioned here, but who is Jesus speaking to? A believer. He is speaking about the resurrection of the death not how to be saved.
Then you quoted Romans 3:24-25. This is speaking of justification. Paul is explaining how justification is through faith and not the Mosaic Law. Again, who is he speaking to? A believer.
Then you quoted Titus 3:4-6. I’ve already addressed this passage. The literal rendering of the Greek is the “Bath of regeneration”.
This is the same thing we saw when Jesus started His ministry, he was baptized and the Spirit descended on Him. However, again who is he speaking to? Believers.
Now, let’s look at some passages that we spoken to or about unbelievers.
Peter Speaking to unbelieving Jews.
Acts 2:38 ( KJV )
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Jesus telling the disciples how to address the lost
Matthew 28:18-20 ( KJV )
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.
Mark 16:15-16 ( KJV )
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Notice these passages that are speaking to or about the lost do mention baptism.
You mentioned Titus 3:4-6, not of works of righteousness that we have done. OK, however, we don’t get to define what works of righteousness are. We need to let Paul define that since he said it. So, what is Paul’s understanding of works of righteousness we have done? We have a clue to his understanding of works of righteousness in Philippians 3:9
Philippians 3:9 ( KJV )
And be found in him, not having
mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
So, we can see that to Paul, his own works of righteousness are works of the Law.
In a previous post I explained how Ephesians 2:8 is speaking of the Mosaic Law. Many Christians quote that verse and say anything we do is a work and we’re not saved by works. That Idea, as I said, is from Martin Luther, not Scripture. Paul’s statement was a reference to works of the Mosaic Law. Paul didn’t have 21st century Americans in mind when he wrote that. We’ve got to understand that passage in context.
So, what would Paul’s statement mean to a 1st century Christian? Well, let’s look at what was happening then. Why would Paul make that statement? The Jews were God’s chosen people, they had God’s word and God’s Law. They thought they were superior to other people. We see this with the Pharisees, they believed that they were better than the average Jew and looked down on people, why? Because they kept the Law, they kept it better than the average Jew. Likewise, an average Jew would think himself superior to a Gentile. The Jews referred to Gentiles as dogs. Again, why would a Jew think this? Because he kept God’s Law and the Gentile didn’t. Therefore a believing Jew who kept the Law would think himself superior to a Gentile believer. We’ve seen that the Judaizers were a big problem to Paul’s ministry. Even when he went up to Jerusalem to inquire of the apostles as to whether or not the Gentiles should keep the Law, there were those at Jerusalem who said that the Gentiles must keep the Law. So, if we understand Paul’s words in the context of a 1st century Jew instead of a 21st century American we can see that Paul is not saying anything someone does is a work to boast about. His words are dealing with a specific situation that was occurring at that time.
Here is another thing to think about. Take notice that the only one you see that says we’re not saved by works is Paul. You don’t see any of the others dealing with this issue, why? Because Paul’s main target was the Gentiles. And Paul was dealing with the Judaizers. The only other time this comes up in Scripture is in James’ letter. However, the issue is slightly different. Paul is dealing with the Mosaic Law of which he say it is not necessary. James on the other hand is writing to Jewish believers, Their basically making the same claim that you are, they have faith and that is all they need. However, James quickly sets them straight. He tells them that faith if it has no works is dead and asks rhetorically can that faith save? The answer is no. He goes on to say that Abraham was justified by works when he offered up Isaac.
We all know Paul’s words In Romans, Abraham believed God and it was counted to him for righteousness. Many Christians quote this passage when they are making the argument that you are. However, let’s look at what God said. First we need to remember that the promises were made to Abraham and that they come through Abraham. We know that Abraham believed God, is that why He receives the promises? Let’s ee.
Genesis 26:1-5 ( KJV )
And there was a famine in the land, beside the first famine that was in the days of Abraham. And Isaac went unto Abimelech king of the Philistines unto Gerar.
And the LORD appeared unto him, and said, Go not down into Egypt; dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of:
Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee; for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father;
And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.
God promised to fulfill the oath He had sworn to Abraham because Abraham “Obeyed” His voice and kept his charge, commands and Laws. This is what James had in mind. God didn’t swear the oath when Abraham believed, He swore it when Abraham “Obeyed”. This account is in Genesis 22.
As I‘ve said, to understand Paul ‘s words to mean anything one does is a work causes conflict with his words in Romans 2 where he clearly says that God will judge everyone according to their deeds. I know you said that is rewards, but even if you want to say that, the reward he lists is eternal life.
You say it is not logical for me to assume that just because baptism is not mentioned, it's not necessary. But I say it's just as illogical to say baptism is essential when it's not mentioned in the passages that speak of salvation.
It’s not illogical. The way we come to truth is to build on the Scriptures. We take what we are given here and there and put it all together to form a complete understanding. For instance, Jeremiah prophesied of the new covenant that God would make with Israel. He didn’t say anything about faith, so do we assume that faith is not necessary? No, why? Because that is just piece of the puzzle. We know another prophet came later and added to that John the Baptists said,
John 1:15-18 ( KJV )
John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
John reveals that Grace and truth have come through Jesus Christ. He also tells that Jew s that it was Jesus that had appeared to their forefather, who had thought they had seen the Father. John says no man has seen God at any time. So, when we see John’s words we add this to what we already know and build an understanding. This is how we understand all of the issues in Scripture
Why, when writing the gospels and letters, would the apostles and disciples not add baptism, when speaking of such essential things?
As I said earlier, look at who is being spoken to. Or, think about when you were in school, when you took algebra in high school. Every time you were taught something new did the teacher begin by teaching you how to add and subtract, or to multiply and divide? No, they knew that you already know that. There was no reason to teach you something you already knew. Likewise, the apostles were writing to Christians. You have to remember they did not have 20,000 denominations out there, the apostles were there and they all believed the same thing. There was no question about baptism so there was no need to really address the issue. Faith on the other was an issue because of the Judaizers and that is why Paul deals with the issue of faith so extensively.
If it was so very important, you would imagine they would tell us. You say I won't find a promise of salvation that excludes baptism, but if it's not even mentioned in so many of the passages (see verses above) then why would you assume that baptism is automatically included?
Because Jesus and Peter both said it was, and Paul made a direct connection between baptism and the resurrection.. We can’t subtract from Scripture. If it was only mentioned once we should assume it is necessary simply because it was stated once. However, it is stated more than once.
Assuming the Bible says something that it's not acutally saying is a good way to fall into trouble, as we can see by all the 'christian cults'.
I’m not. The Bible states clearly that he who believes and is baptized shall be saved. Peter said, repent and be baptized for the remission of sins and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit. Ananias said to Paul, why tarriest thou? Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins. Peter said, baptism does now save us, not the washing of the filth of the flesh but the request of a good conscience towards God. Paul said God had saved them by the Bath of Regeneration and renewing of the holy Spirit.
As I keep saying, it's more important to stick to what the Bible actually says...and it says, time and again, that Jesus is our salvation, works are nothing, the Holy Spirit is the one who 'washes us clean'.
I’ve pointed out above that the Bible does say that baptism is tied to salvation. The Scriptures don’t say works are nothing, they say the works of the Mosaic Law are insufficient for justification. As I’ve pointed out, James makes the case that a man is justified by works. We saw God’s words to Isaac and how He said that He would fulfill the oath to Abraham because Abraham obeyed him. Likewise we saw Paul’s words that those who continue in well doing are seeking eternal life. Then we have the words of Jesus in John 5.
John 5:28-29 ( KJV )
Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,
And shall come forth;
they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.
We see here that Jesus said, those who have done good are raised to life and those who have done evil are raised to condemnation.
He says the same thing in Mathew 25.
Matthew 25:31-46 ( KJV )
When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory:
And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats:
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.
Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:
Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.
Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:
For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:
I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.
Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungered, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?
Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.
And these shall go away into everlasting punishment:
but the righteous into life eternal.
Notice the sheep are righteous not based on what they believed, but on what they did, and what was the reward? Eternal life. We have the same scenario again in Mathew 7.
Matthew 7:21-23 ( KJV )
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.
Again, why were these rejected? Not because of what they believed, but based on what they did, “Ye that work iniquity”.
The apostle John says that same thing when he writes the book of Revelation.
Revelation 20:11-13 ( KJV )
And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
Again, every man was judged according to his works, not his beliefs. Paul also said that God will judge every man according to his deeds.Look at the book of Revelation, what did Jesus say to every one of those seven churches? I know your works.Jesus said in John, If you love me keep my commands. He said ‘he who keeps my commands it is he who loves me’ and He said, ‘He who does not keep my commands does not love me’.
If, when you say that Jesus claimed 'who believes and is baptized', you are speaking of Mark 16:16, then I caution you on it. This part of scripture was not in the earlier manuscripts of scripture, and should be regarding carefully. The passage also says that those who believe in Him will drink poison and not die and pick up serpents. These images are not found elsewhere, and while we are promised protection from Satan, clearly Christians are still subject to the sinful nature of this world, as so many suffering Christians would tell us.
I was referring to Mark 16:16, and I am quite aware of the controversy regarding that section of Scripture. However, I think the arguments are flawed. You said Mark 16:16 doesn’t appear in the earlier manuscripts. You are partly correct. It doesn’t appear in “Some” earlier manuscripts. However, the earliest manuscripts we have available are from around 400 AD. That is roughly 3oo years after the apostle John. There is however, evidence that the long ending of Mark was around much earlier than this, Irenaeus quotes from the long ending and he wrote around 180 AD. That is only about 80 years after John.
The passage does also speak of those who drink poison and are not harmed. However, I notice you didn’t mention any of the other things mentioned there. Do you realize what you are doing here? You didn’t mention any of those others that are spoken of in Scripture abundantly. Do we also question those? This seems to be intellectually dishonest to me. If we are going to dismiss the poison passage then we must do likewise with the others.
Actually, however, that gift is mentioned, one in Scripture and once by the early church writers.
Acts 28:1-6 ( KJV )
And when they were escaped, then they knew that the island was called Melita.
And the barbarous people showed us no little kindness: for they kindled a fire, and received us every one, because of the present rain, and because of the cold.
And when Paul had gathered a bundle of sticks, and laid them on the fire, there came a viper out of the heat, and fastened on his hand.
And when the barbarians saw the venomous beast hang on his hand, they said among themselves, No doubt this man is a murderer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance suffereth not to live.
And he shook off the beast into the fire, and felt no harm.
Howbeit they looked when he should have swollen, or fallen down dead suddenly: but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said that he was a god.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180 AD
[Papias, who is now mentioned by us, affirms that he received the sayings of the apostles from those who accompanied them, and he moreover asserts that he heard in person Aristion and the presbyter John. Accordingly he mentions them frequently by name, and in his writings gives their traditions. Our notice of these circumstances may not be without its use. It may also be worth while to add to the statements of Papias already given, other passages of his in which he relates some miraculous deeds, stating that he acquired the knowledge of them from tradition. The residence of the Apostle Philip with his daughters in Hierapolis has been mentioned above. We must now point out how Papias, who lived at the same time, relates that he had received a wonderful narrative from the daughters of Philip. For he relates that a dead man was raised to life in his day.He also mentions another miracle relating to Justus, surnamed Barsabas, how he swallowed a deadly poison, and received no harm, on account of the grace of the Lord.
But even supposing that Mark truly wrote this, that Jesus truly spoke it, I remind you that when Jesus spoke of 'baptism' He was not always speaking of water. Often He speaks of the Holy Spirit, and how those who believe in Him will recieve it. We know that John the Baptiser taught how Jesus would baptise with the Holy Spirit (Matt 3:11). And also, Jesus says in Mark 10:39 of how He Himself would be experiancing a baptism of sorts...not one of water, but one of suffering. So to assume when Jesus says 'believes and is baptized' He means to be baptized with water, is just that, an assumption. Most likely Jesus is refering to beleiving in Him, and recieving the Holy Spirit, just as He said to the disciples in Acts 1:5 "for John Baptized with water,but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now."
You said I was making an assumption and then you said, “Most likely”. Isn’t that also an assumption?
I am not making an assumption. The passage is Mark 16 is the counterpart of Mathew’s account of the Great Commission. Mark is giving his account. In Mathew’s account the disciples are told to baptize the nations, this is clear water baptism. This is the same account that Mark is recording, so Jesus was speaking of water baptism here.
We can’t just choose what the words refer to. The common source of baptism is and was water. Therefore unless there is a qualifier, the default method is assumed. For instance, if you said to your family I am going to take a bath, they would assume you are going to use water. They would ask you what are you bathing in, they would simply assume water. If I said to you, I am going to wash my car, you would assume I am using water. You wouldn’t wonder is he going to wash his car with water or milk or apple juice, you would simply assume water because that is the default method and I have not qualified the washing. However, if I said I am going to bathe in apple juice you would know that the method was unusual and not the default method, because I have given a qualifier, apple juice.
Wrong. I'm sorry, but you cannot diminish the cross. All of the Bible, both OT and NT is heading, pointing towards the cross and the work done there. Yes, the KoG is a big part of what Jesus came to die for, but for us to reach the Kingdom of God, Jesus had to die. Without the cross none of us would ever see the Kingdom, we would all recieve what we deserved...hell.
Yes, the ressurection is a huge, as is the need to live in the light...a holy life in Christ. But you're still missing the point. All of these things...every single thing we get from and with salvation, was accomplished on the cross. As Paul said, "We preach Christ crucified."
I’ve already shown you that Jesus himself said that He came to preach the kingdom of God. I say the cross was part of the reason He came, however, as I said, it was a part of the reason, not the totality of it. Please explain to me how beneficial the cross would be to eternal life if there was no resurrection. Yes, Paul did preach Christ crucified, however, again, you need to keep that statement in context. There are several passages of Scripture that state that Paul preached the kingdom of God. Christ crucified is part of the preaching of the kingdom of God, however, that kingdom of God contains a lot more. Paul himself said.
1 Corinthians 15:12-19 ( KJV )
Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen:
And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not.
For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.
So, Paul also preached the resurrection of Christ. Do you see what Paul said? If Christ is not risen then they are still in their sins. Even though Christ had already gone to the cross, Paul said if He is not risen then they are still in theirs and those who had previously died had perished. This shows that Paul knew and preached more than just the cross. It also shows that what happened on the cross was not the totality of what was necessary for salvation.
No, we don't have laws, we have the Holy Spirit. The deal with the Mosaic Laws was that the Jews needed to keep them perfectly to recieve salvation. Of course they couldn't, that's why Jesus was necesary. But the thing about Laws is this: you keep them or you get punished. Under the new covenant of Christ we have salvation and the promise from Jesus that those He holds in the palm of His hand, He will not let go. When we become Christians we recieve the Holy Spirit. It is the guiding of the Spirit that convicts us of sin and guides and encourages us to live in the light, to become more Christ like as we live. As Christians yes, we should strive to live a better life, we should fight to put sin to death every day. But should we falter and fall...we are still loved and still saved. This is the characteristic of grace, not law. All the things that Jesus tell us to do, that Paul continues to teach...they come out of and through love, through Spirit living, not the structures of law, be it old or new law.
Firstly, there was no promise of salvation through the Law. Paul says that the law was a tutor to lead the Jews to Christ.
Regarding the New Covenant Laws, they are there. I gave you the words of the writer of Hebrews. How he explains that there being a change of the priesthood there is of “Necessity” a change of the Law. It doesn’t get much clearer than that. He didn’t say there is no longer a law, He said there is a change in the Law. He goes on in chapter 8 to quote the Jeremiah and the promise of the New Covenant. He says,
Hebrews 8:10-12 ( KJV )
For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people:
And they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest.
For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more.
Notice what he prophecy says, “ I will put my Laws in their hearts” So the Christian does have a law. Jesus told us what they were in the Sermon on the Mount.
'New things' just means new, not new laws. Jesus indeed brought a new covenant, but not new laws.
On the contrary, I just showed above where God spoke of writing His law on their hearts. The New Covenant has laws.
Having to abide by laws is in direct opposistion to everything that Paul teaches us.
No it’s not. Paul taught all over the place that one must remain in the faith. That is equivalent to remaining “In Christ” Jesus said, if a man does not obey His commands that man does not love Him. Obviously if one does not love Christ, he is not in Christ.
It gives us something to boast in...something that we do ourselves that brings righteousness. 'I've kept these laws, so i'm a good person'. No, everything we do is but filth before God, it is ONLY through the gift of grace that we are saved. By definintion a gift is something that we do NOTHING to recieve or keep.
Again, you have the boasting passage out of context. That is dealing with the Mosaic Law. You said it gives one the opportunity to say I have kept these laws. Well, look what Jesus said.
Luke 13:23-24 ( KJV )
Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
Doesn’t striving require one to do something? Jesus said strive to enter in. How can you say there is nothing for us to do, when Jesus said strive?
On the same note, doing something to enter in.
Revelation 3:4 ( KJV )
Thou hast a few names even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with me in white: for they are worthy.
Jesus said some of these believers are worthy. They are worthy because they didn’t defile their garments, they obeyed Jesus’ commands.
Changing old for new doesn't mean it's the same thing. We're not just switching to a newer model. The old system didn't just need a patch to fix it, it needed something completely new.
We know that Jesus is all for us. He is prophet, who speaks to us, and priest who serves us and the king who rules us. This is a new and wonderful change, but it by no means speaks to the fact that we have new laws.
On the contrary, I’ve given you the words of Christ and God Himself, what more is needed? The old covenant is gone and the new is in place. Jesus gave the requirements of the new and He said, he who loves me keeps my commands. These are Jesus’ words not mine. He said if a man does not keep my commands, he does not love me. We can talk all we want about loving Jesus, we can even convince ourselves and others that we love Jesus. But, we can fool Jesus, He said, if a man does not keep my commands he does not love me.
Jesus tells us (as does the apostles) that baptism is a good thing, just as not being ashamed about Jesus. But they do not say that salvation is contingent on water baptism. Water baptism is an outward symbol of an inward change...that is all. Salvation comes from faith and from the Holy Spirit.
Part of Salvation comes from faith and the Spirit. I have presented an enormous amount of evidence. The Scriptures are clear, the evidence from the early church is clear. The question is will you accept it or continue to accept the words of Martin Luther?
There is another thing to think about. You or Ducky asked if I also thought that the communion was necessary. I would ask what was meant by Jesus’ words, ‘Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man you have no life in you?
Now, consider this, we were talking about symbols. In the OT God told Moses to build the Tabernacle. He told him to build it exactly as he was told. God wanted it built exact as He commanded. He wanted is so exact that He put his Spirit on the boulders so that the Spirit could instruct them in the building. Why do you suppose that it was so important that it be done exactly as God said?
In the OT were are told,
Leviticus 10:1-2 ( KJV )
And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not.
And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.
Why do you suppose they were killed for offering strange fire? God had stated how He wanted things done, there was a reason. The reason was because what was happening on earth was a symbol of what was happening in heaven. God was using earthly things to teach of heavenly things. He was showing how things go in the heavenly realm. So, when someone did something differently than the way God had stated they were effectively teaching something other than what God wanted taught. In effect it was false teaching. The writer of Hebrews elaborates on this.
Hebrews 8:1-5 ( KJV )
Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens;
A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer.
For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the mount.
He said the earthly priests serve as a shadow and example of heavenly things. So, we see that these symbols were not something that one could just dismiss or do as they saw fit. As we saw, Nadab and Abihu died for not following the symbolism correctly.
What about the New Testament, well, we see the same thing. Paul writes to the Corinthians and rebukes them for abusing the Lord’s Supper or communion. However, it seems the Lord had given Paul some insight to what was happening. Look at what Paul said.
1 Corinthians 11:23-31 ( KJV )
For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:
And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.
After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.
For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till he come.
Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.
For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.
For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.
Do you see it? Paul says that because they were abusing the communion that some of them were weak or sick and some had actually died. So it seems that God also takes the symbolism in the New Testament just as seriously. Now as I said before, our going into the water is symbolic it is a representation of our union with Christ. It is symbolic of what is happening in heaven. When we go into the water with an appeal to God, we acting in the physical realm, however, God is working in the Spiritual realm and is cleansing us and joining us with Christ.
As I said, the evidence is overwhelming, and it is scary to think that those Corinthians died for abusing the communion. I think it behooves us to be very careful before we tell anyone that something God said isn’t necessary.
As further evidence I will give you the understanding of those who were there. This first passage is particularly important because it is from Ignatius. Ignatius was a disciple of the apostle John, so he was taught by John. In addition he was appointed as the third bishop at the church of Antioch , by none other than the apostle Peter. Since Peter appointed him he has some pretty good credentials and Peter’s backing, no doubt John’s backing also. Now, we have to wonder does anyone really believe that the apostle Peter would appoint someone to head the church that He didn’t feel was grounded in the faith and who taught true doctrine? We see from the quote below that Ignatius is quoting Paul from Romans 6 and says that it is by baptism they may be partakers of His resurrection. So, Ignatius is saying the baptism makes one a partaker of the resurrection, and knowing this Peter appoints him as bishop at Antioch. One can only assume that Peter approved of this.
Ignatius was a disciple of the apostle John
Ignatius appeals to Rom. 6:5
"Wherefore also, ye appear to me to live not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ, who died for us, in order that, by believing in His death, ye may by baptism be made partakers of His resurrection." (Ignatius, Epistle to the Trallians, II)
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Barnabas 70-130
Further, what says He? “And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever.” (Ezek. 47:12) This meaneth, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. “And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever,”
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Hermas 150
And I said to him, “I should like to continue my questions.” “Speak on,” said he. And I said, “I heard, sir, some teachers maintain that there is no other repentance than that which takes place, when we descended into the water and received remission of our former sins.” He said to me, “That was sound doctrine which you heard; for that is really the case. For he who has received remission of his sins ought not to sin any more, but to live in purity
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Hermas 150
Accordingly, those also who fell asleep received the seal of the Son of God. For,” he continued, “before a man bears the name of the Son of God he is dead; but when he receives the seal he lays aside his deadness, and obtains life. The seal, then, is the water: they descend into the water dead, and they arise alive.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Justin Martyr 160
Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Justin Martyr 160
But there is no other [way] than this,—to become acquainted with this Christ, to be washed in the fountain spoken of by Isaiah for the remission of sins; and for the rest, to live sinless lives.”
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180 Disciple of Polycarp who was a disciple of the apostle John.
In refuting the Gnostics
And when we come to refute them, we shall show in its fitting-place, that this class of men have been instigated by Satan to a denial of that baptism which is regeneration to God, and thus to a renunciation of the whole [Christian] faith.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 1
Irenaeus 180
“And dipped himself,” says [the Scripture], “seven times in Jordan.” (2 Ki. 5:14) It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [it served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: “Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (John 3:5)
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 2
Clement of Alexandria 195
Then within the same period John prophesied till the baptism of salvation; and after the birth of Christ, Anna and Simeon.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195
Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life!
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195
But we, little fishes, after the example of our ΙΧΘΥΣ Jesus Christ, are born in water,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 3
Tertullian 195
When, however, the prescript is laid down that “without baptism, salvation is attainable by none” (chiefly on the ground of that declaration of the Lord, who says, “Unless one be born of water, he hath not life” (John 3:5, not fully given)), there arise immediately scrupulous, nay rather audacious, doubts on the part of some,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9
Origen 228
Matthew alone adds the words “to repentance,” teaching that the benefit of baptism is connected with the intention of the baptized person; to him who repents it is salutary, but to him who comes to it without repentance it will turn to greater condemnation.
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 9
Origen 228
“by the laver of regeneration,” (Titus 3:5) through which they were born “as new-born babes,
The Early Church Fathers: Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume 6
Pamohilius 309
Of the divine descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost which lighted on them who believed. In this we have also the instruction delivered by Peter, and * passages from the prophets on the subject, and * on the passion and resurrection and assumption of Christ, and the gift of the Holy Ghost; also * of the faith of those present, and their salvation by baptism; and, further,* of the unity of spirit pervading the believers and promoting the common good, and of the addition made to their number.
